Recent patent infringement suits filed in U.S. District Courts

By Marilyn Tennissen | Nov 19, 2008

Marshall Division

Nov. 13

  • Calypso Wireless Inc. vs. T-Mobile USA Inc.

    Plaintiff Calypso is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Montgomery County, Texas. Calypso claims to own the rights to U.S. Patent No. 6,680,923 B1 issued Jan. 20, 2004, to inventor Robert Leon.

    The '923 Patent for a Communication System and Method relates to seamless fixed mobile convergence which allows a seamless "hand off" between cellular networks and wireless local area networks.

    Calypso alleges T-Mobile has infringed and continues to infringe the '923 Patent by making, using or selling software/firmware, hardware and services embodying the inventions of the patent-in-suit.

    The plaintiff also alleges that T-Mobile's infringement has been willful and with full knowledge of the legally protect status of the '923 Patent.

    Calypso is seeking injunctive relief, actual and treble damages, attorneys' fees, costs of court and other just and proper relief.

    The plaintiff is represented by E. Armistead Easterby of the Williams Kherkher firm in Houston.

    The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge T. John Ward and has been referred to Magistrate Judge Charles Everingham.

    Case No. 2:08-cv-441-TJW-CE

    Tyler Division

    Nov. 14

  • Pozen Inc. vs. Par Pharmaceutical Inc.

    North Carolina-based Pozen states it is a specialty pharmaceutical company "dedicated to developing therapeutic advancements for diseases with unmet medical needs."

    "Pozen currently specializes in innovative drug products designed to alleviate patient pain and suffering," the complaint states.

    The complaint deals with three patents to which Pozen claims to own the rights: U.S. Patent No. 6,060,499; U.S. Patent No. 6,586,458; and U.S. Patent No. 7,332,183.

    The '499 and '458 Patents were issued in 2000 and 2003, respectively, and both deal with headache and anti-migraine medications using 5-HT agonists in combination with long-acting non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS).

    The '183 Patent was issued on Feb. 19, 2008, for multilayer dosage forms containing NSAIDS and triptans.

    According to the complaint, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved Posen's application for a new drug, Treximet, a tablet that contains both an NSAID and a triptan, in April. The FDA also listed the '499, '458 and '183 Patents in connection with the Treximet application in the "Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations" book.

    Pozen alleges that Par Pharmaceuticals filed an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) to the FDA seeking approval to make and sell a generic version of Treximet, which has the same content combination of NSAID and triptan in the same quantities (ANDA No. 90-753).

    On Oct. 8, Par sent a letter to Pozen advising that it had submitted the accelerated new drug application. In the application, Par said it had included its opinion that the three Pozen patents were invalid and/or would not be infringed by the manufacture of Par's generic product.

    The suit states that the notice advised Pozen that Par intended to market the generic product before the expiration of the Pozen patents and that Par offered to give Pozen confidential access to its drug application.

    Pozen claims it made the request for access to the application and that Par provided what appeared to be at least a portion of Par's accelerated new drug application.

    Nonetheless, Pozen alleges that by submitting ANDA 90-753, Par is infringing the '499, '458 and '183 Patents.

    Pozen is asking for a judgment that the ANDA is infringing the patents and an order that the ANDA effective date not be earlier than the expiration of the patents.

    The plaintiff is also seeking a permanent injunction against PAR restraining it from making, using or selling the generic product; costs and expenses incurred in pursuing the legal action; and any other just and proper relief.

    Willem B. Schurrman of Vinson & Elkins LLP in Austin is lead counsel for the plaintiff, with attorneys from Ireland Carroll & Kelley PC in Tyler.

    The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Leonard E. Davis.

    Case No. 6:08-cv-437-LED

  • Want to get notified whenever we write about Williams Kherkher Hart Boundas LLP ?

    Sign-up Next time we write about Williams Kherkher Hart Boundas LLP, we'll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.

    Organizations in this Story

    Williams Kherkher Hart Boundas LLP

    More News

    The Record Network